[Dave S]

It's plenty easy to find reasons to bash the ACLU but this is a poor example. Not only is the guy clearly in violation of a number of ordinances which the city is in its right to have, the BLINKING SIGN, close to a heavily traveled street is major driving hazard. When I saw this on Fox News the other day, the clear reason the city was not allowing his sign was fear that it would cause traffic accidents. But I perhaps you dont care about someone dying if there is a chance that this one sign is going to bring someone to the Lord or even worse that it interferes with your expression of religion.

[gdc61]

so are you supporting the laws or are just bashing christianity?

[milan]

I didn't write the story. Don't get upset with me.

The ACLU guy they spoke with said nothing about driving hazard...which I am not even familiar with the area, but hear it points out over a river. On the other side of the river is a highway. How would that be a driving hazard? Apparently it doesn't face the road on the other side of the building either.

But I perhaps you dont care about someone dying if there is a chance that this one sign is going to bring someone to the Lord or even worse that it interferes with your expression of religion.

Sounds like you may have some issues with Christ yourself.

[WOSG]

If what you say is true, the sign WOULD bring people closer to the Lord, and soon! :-)